Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
6
Can Existence Be Better for a
Being Than Non-Existence?
1 Introduction
As we have seen, the Prior Existence View needs the assumption that
causing a being to exist cannot harm or benefit that being. In the present
chapter, I will defend this assumption.
If we talk about making someone 'better off', we implicitly make a
comparison about the goodness of two or more different states of affairs
for a being. For instance, if I say that accepting a job offer was good for
me, I make a comparison between two states of affairs in terms of how
good they are for me. In case of bringing someone into existence, if that
being was not brought into existence, then what? If the being, say the
animal, were not brought into existence, it would not live at all. So,
we need to compare a situation in which the animal has a good, bad
or neutral life with a situation in which the animal does not exist at
all. We need to make this comparison in terms of what would be better
for the animal. Can we say that one situation is better for a being than
another situation, when in one of these situations the being does not
exist? Comparisons between existence and non-existence are special.
Can these comparisons be made, and, if so, how? This is what we need
to find out in order to determine whether bringing a being into exist-
ence can benefit or harm this being.
How to address the question whether existence can be better for a
being than non-existence? In order to give a positive answer to this
question, one must compare the animal's welfare in an outcome in
which the animal exists with its welfare in an outcome in which it does
not exist. It is controversial whether, and if so how, existence and non-
existence can be compared in terms of welfare. I will first introduce the
view that coming into existence can make a being better or worse off.
79
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search